Patna High Court
Suman Kumar Mandal @ Suman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the refusal of anticipatory bail and granted it to the appellant, subject to conditions, under the powers conferred by Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act and Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The appellant, Suman Kumar Mandal, was charged under several provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the Income Tax Act for alleged assault, intimidation and defamation related to a viral video. He sought anticipatory bail, but the Special Judge under the SC/ST Act refused the prayer. The appellant contended that he had a clean record and was falsely implicated, arguing that the FIR primarily targeted another individual and that the allegations against him were vague. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences under the SC/ST Act. The Patna High Court, applying Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act and the inherent powers of the court under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, set aside the lower court’s order and granted anticipatory bail subject to monetary and surety conditions. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- The applicability of Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act to grant anticipatory bail.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR sufficiently justify denial of anticipatory bail in offences punishable under the SC/ST Act.
- The scope of the trial court’s inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Income Tax Act — s. 67
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 14-A(2), 308(3), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste atrocities
- false implication
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.981 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Purnia
======================================================
Suman Kumar Mandal @ Suman Kumar S/O Sri Kunj Bihari Mandal R/O
Vill.- Mehadi Ward no. 6, P.S.- Tikapatti, Dist.- Purnia.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pravin Ravidas S/O Late Natthan Ravidas R/O Vill.- Mehadi Ward no. 6,
P.S.- Tikapatti, Dist.- Purnia.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate
Ms. Kanu Priya, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. Mr. Binay Krishna for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 18.12.2025 in A.B.P. No. 67 of 2025 passed by the
learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Purnea in connection with SC/ST
P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 308(3), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.981 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act and
Section 67 of the I.T. Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on 11.08.2025 at 06:00AM, while he was surfing
Facebook, he saw his obscene video and photo with a girl, next
alleges that on 28.07.2025 Ranjeet had demanded two thousand
silver coins and had threatened to viral the video if demand not
met, hence the informant went to meet Ranjeet at Tikapatti
market where appellant along with other accused were also
present and they also abused him and demanded 2000 silver
coins and abused in public view and also defamed him by
publishing the same in local newspaper.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that thrust of
the allegation is against Ranjeet; and as far as appellant is
concerned, the allegation against him is general and omnibus in
nature. It is also submitted that it does not appear probable that
all the accused persons present at the place of occurrence in one
go would have abused the informant by taking caste name.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.981 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court
in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.